2013 QCCQ 8182, 2013 QCCQ 8182

Protection de la jeunesse — 131657 2013 QCCQ 8182 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN […] Youth Division DATE: March 13, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE BIGUÉ J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: No. 605-41-000716-118 X , born […], 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ A Mother and [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre de Jeunesse A Petitioner ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON REVISION (section 95, Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] This is further to a petition pursuant to

section 95 of the Youth Protection Act concerning X, 14 months old at the time of the hearing. The Director of Youth Protection (Director) is seeking a placement in a foster family for a period of 12 months. [ 2 ] The child’s mother is A, 17 years old, subject of a separate judgment in the record bearing number 605-41-000705-111. A joint hearing was held for both cases. [ 3 ] The parties were represented as follows: Mtre. Pierre Grygiel for the Director, Mtre. Mylène Grondin for the mother and Mtre. Marie-Claire Lemieux for the child. There is no declared father on the birth certificate.

ISSUES RAISED [ 4 ] The allegations of the petition are admitted, and the parties agree to the measures proposed by the Director. THE FACTS [ 5 ] The previous decision was rendered by Lucille Chabot J. on August 31, 2012. She accepted a draft agreement signed the same day. She ordered placement of the child and her mother, A , in a foster family, until February 17, 2013. [ 6 ] As appears from the birth certificate, no father is declared for the child X. However, A's boyfriend, B, is deemed to be the biological father. He did not ask to be an interested party in the present case.

ANALYSIS [ 7 ] The mother and her daughter were together with the same foster family between February and October 2012. However, the mother did not respect the rules at the foster home, and she neglected her parental responsibilities, preferring her status of teenager to her duties as a mother. She had to be placed in the rehabilitation centre in October 2012. [ 8 ] Since then, however, the mother has had regular contact with her child, X, in order to maintain the significant bonds that exist between the mother and the child. [ 9 ] The mother perseveres in changing her behaviour in order not to lose her child.

We must keep in mind that the mother is still a teenager. She will have to be supported and helped to reach balanced decisions in order to avoid neglecting her parental responsibilities concerning her daughter. In the meantime, the mother is happy to rely on the foster family because her child is at an age where she needs a lot of energy from the parents, to respond to her needs. The mother trusts the foster home and has a good relationship with the foster family. [ 10 ] Even if the mother feels the need to maintain contact with her former boyfriend, B, it seems that the relationship is over. Mr.

B is not involved with X. The bond between X and her mother, A, is important. [ 11 ] However, the mother has to solve her own problems in order to be able to provide security for the child in the future.

[ 12 ] For now, security and stability will be provided to the child by the foster family, for the next 12 months. There is hope in the mother’s potential to get back on track in order to be able to take care of the child. [ 13 ] The mother has to address her problematic behaviour, which puts the child at risk of negligence.

The mother will hopefully benefit from her stay at the rehabilitation centre, after which the Director will have to conduct close follow-up of X’s situation. [ 14 ] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 15 ] GRANTS the petition. [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of X, born […], 2011, are still in danger. [ 17 ] ORDERS that the child remain entrusted to a foster family for a period of 12 months. [ 18 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and to the mother for a period of 24 months. [ 19 ] ORDERS that regular contact be maintained between the mother and the child, and that it be supervised by the Director as to terms and frequency. [ 20 ] ORDERS that contact between the youth and B be supervised by the Director as to terms and conditions, subject to the presence of a third party, if deemed necessary by the Director. [ 21 ] ORDERS that the child receive health care and health services as required by her condition. [ 22 ] MAINTAINS all of the previously ordered measures that are not obsolete. [ 23 ] ORDERS that the police collaborate in the execution of this judgment. [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the child’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the present judgment __________________________________ CLAUDE BIGUÉ, J.C.Q.

Mtre. Pierre Grygiel Counsel for the petitioner Mtre. Marie-Claire Lemieux Counsel for the child Mtre. Mylène Grondin Counsel for the mother Date of hearing: January 17, 2013